I had another question come up with the ESV today (English Standard Version), so I thought I would post a round-up of blogs that address these issues. As an ordained Free Methodist, I cannot put this too strongly. The ESV is not suitable for use in our denomination. (The NLT is similarly problematic. I recommend the CEB, the 2011 NIV, and the NRSVue.)
The scholars involved in the ESV are overwhelmingly male:
- 14 men on the translation oversight committee–no women.
- 50 men on the translation review board–no women.
- 51 men and 3 women on the advisory committee.
- Many are actively involved in the CBMW.
The Council for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood is dedicated to the promotion of what they believe to be the God-ordained complementary roles for men and women including the unilateral submission of wives to husbands and the prohibition of women from leadership roles in the church. The Free Methodist church, by contrast, believes in mutual submission in marriage as in the church (Eph 5:21). We also believe in leadership according to gifts and calling, regardless of gender (Rom 12; 1 Cor 12).
Is it a problem that men translate the Bible? No.
Is it a problem that only men translate the Bible? Yes. It signals a lack of humility in the possibility of objectivity when one is not consulting people with other perspectives and points of view. It signals a decision that theology precedes translation.
Now some links:
This link takes you to a paper by Mark Strauss. Note that he, himself, is a complementarian; however, he finds many problems with the ESV beyond gender translation issues.
Next comes a broad sampling of gender translation problems from Carolyn Custis James.
Matt Lynch explains Gen 3:16 in detail, and also provides a heads-up on the odd permanent/non-permanent hiccup the translation went through.
Marg Mowczko brings in Romans 16:7 and the Junia debate and deftly discusses the unwarranted insertion of modern concepts of masculinity.
Dr. Kevin Giles has been sounding the alarm about the ways complementarianism slides into the early church heresy of subordinationism for years. Phillip Cary summarizes the issues in “The New Evangelical Subordinationism.” The ESV translation supports this heresy in some places. For more on this, see Gentle Reformation’s discussion on this podcast, and Rachel Miller’s blog post.
Does all this really matter? Yes! Poor translations communicate to both women and men that women are not fully included. If you are not grounding your reading and preaching in the Hebrew and Greek texts, I recommend that you rely on the CEB, the NIV2011, and the NRSVue. I also regularly check the NJB.
The Passion “Translation” comes up from time to time. I appreciate what Dr. Nijay Gupta says here.